Why Disjoint Gaussian Moving-Average Outputs Are Independent
Summary
The document considers a finite moving-average process and asks whether two outputs separated by more than the filter length are independent. Each output is a linear combination of Gaussian inputs. If the inputs are independent, the two outputs use disjoint sets of them when the time gap exceeds the order of the moving average.
One answer shows that their covariance is zero by expanding the covariance and using independence of the underlying inputs. A second approach represents both outputs as a joint linear transformation of a Gaussian vector; the resulting covariance matrix is diagonal. Since jointly Gaussian variables with zero covariance are independent, these arguments establish independence, not just that each output is Gaussian. The result depends on the independent-input assumption: Gaussianity alone does not establish it. The discussion describes the covariance and matrix arguments, rather than deriving the joint density as originally requested.
Key ideas
- When the lag exceeds the moving-average order, the two outputs depend on disjoint input observations.
- If the inputs are independent, the separated outputs have zero covariance.
- Jointly Gaussian variables with zero covariance are independent.
- The conclusion requires independent Gaussian inputs, not merely Gaussian marginal distributions.
Tags
Full text
# Show that $Y_t$ and $Y_{t+h}$ are independent if $X_t$ is Gaussian
# Show that $Y_t$ and $Y_{t+h}$ are independent if $X_t$ is Gaussian
If $Y_t=\sum_{i=0}^qa_iX_{t-i}$ where $X_{t-i}$ is Gaussian with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$, how do I show that $Y_t$ and $Y_{t+h}$ are independent (for $|h|>q$) using the joint pdf. I know this question has been asked before (here) but the answer is not what I'm looking for since independence is not shown, but only that $Y_t$ is Gaussian. I want to show independence between $Y_t$ and $Y_{t+h}$ by writing their joint pdf as the product of their marginal pdf's.
## Answer by mark leeds (score 1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/63511
Hi Parseval: Let me put an answer here and hopefully it's clear. I fixed it so that $\mu = 0 $ is not needed but of course, the independent Gaussian assumption is still needed.
(1) $Y_t = \sum_{i=0}^{q} a_{i} X_{t-i}$
(2) $Y_{t+h} = \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_j X_{t+h-j}$
$ h > q$.
Note that the last (earliest ) term in (2) is $a_{q} X_{t+h-q}$ and first (latest ) term in (1) is $a_{0} X_{t}$. Therefore, since $h > q$, none of the noise terms in $Y_t$ overlap with any of the the noise terms in $Y_{t+h}$.
Now, the usual definition of covariance, gives:
$Cov(Y_{t}, Y_{t+h}) = E(\sum_{i=0}^{q} a_{i} X_{t-i} \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_{j} X_{t+h-j}) - E(\sum_{i=0}^{q} a_{i} X_{t-i}) E(\sum_{j=0}^{q} a_j X_{t+h-j}) $
So, for the first term we have the two sums multiplying each other and then an expectation is taken. Then, for the second term, we have two expectations multiplying each other.
FIRST SIMPLIFY THE SECOND TERM
Taking the expectations of the terms, we get $\sum_{i=0}^{q} a_{i} \mu \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_j \mu = \mu^2 \sum_{i=0}^{q} a_{i} \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_j$.
Simplifying this, results in:
$ \mu^2 \sum_{i=0}^{q} \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_i a_j $
NOW SIMPLIFY THE FIRST TERM:
$ E(\sum_{i=0}^{q} a_i X_{t-i} \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_j X_{t+h-j}) = $
$( \sum_{i=0}^{q} \sum_{j=0}^{q} a_{i} a_j ) E(X_{t-i} X_{t+h-j})$
But we showed earlier than that none of the terms in the very last expectation overlap, and, since they are independent Gaussians, we can re-write the last expression as $ E(X_{t-i} X_{(t+h-j)}) = E(X_{t-i}) E(X_{(t+h-j)}) = \mu^2$.
So, we showed that the first term equals the same thing as the second term which means that $Cov(Y_{t}, Y_{t+h}) = 0 $.
Note though that I needed the assumption that the X_{t} are independent Gaussian RV's but this is the usual assumption in the MA(q) model.
## Answer by steveo'america (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/63523
If you are going to assume the $X_t$ are independent, then write $\vec{X}$ as the vector of $X_{t-q},\ldots,X_t,X_{t+h-q},\ldots,X_{t+h}$. Then $\vec{X} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(\mu \vec{1},\Sigma\right)$, where $\Sigma$ is a diagonal matrix. Then the vector of the two $Y$ values is $A \vec{X}$ for some block matrix that has one row of $q+1$ of the $a_i$, then $q+1$ zeros, then $q+1$ zeros and then the $a_i$ in the second row. Simple to confirm that $A\Sigma A^{\top}$ is diagonal.Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.